Comment requested by the PiS associate Marcin Warchol translated by the President: – Despite procedural flaws, the president took a vow from 2 judges, as during the current presidential word there were 2 vacancyes for which the president takes responsibility. Hearing specified words, a constitutionalist Professor Sławomir Patyra You catch your head: – ZI'm standing up to what you can come up with to embarrass yourself more. After all, the past of the Polish strategy did not begin with the election of Karol Nawrocki and did not end at the time erstwhile his predecessor's word passed. There is simply a continuity of state power. The president, whoever he is, has to do even as formal a task as enabling him to take his oath. all president has a work to organize specified a ceremony. Marcin Warchoł adds:
– The president has not determined the destiny of the another four. Legal analyses are ongoing; it is possible that another judges could be sworn in. Meanwhile, these 4 with Marshal Czarzasty chose the worst variant possible. They made a vow to the talker of the Sejm, while no regulation of law provides for specified a solution. Article 7 of the Constitution requires each State body to do only what is expressly provided for in the law. You can't presume competence and usurp them. They filed a pseudo-marriage, power was abused, the law was broken. Professor Sławomir Patyra asks to spare all specified remarks: – It is wonderful that Mr Warchol yet sees the fact that public authorities cannot usurp any competence. However, it does not announcement a causal relationship. O fate! The president has no authority to decide the destiny of the judges. The powers to analyse the election of the Constitutional Court judges, or their predisposition to exercise office, are not the work of the president of the Republic of Poland. Warchol admitted that the Sejm was indeed choosing not candidates, but judges of the Court, but in his opinion, the judge's business relation arises after the oath has been made, and the president has the right and even has to make an evaluation of the judges elected by the Sejm. When asked on what basis, he adds: – This is referred to in Article 7 of the Constitution, which prohibits unlawful action. When he hears the question, isn't it sometimes “warcholing the law”, he smiles and answers:
– It's just reading the constitution as it is, not as it seems to Donald Tusk. The PiS MP believes that there has been organization violence, recalls the articles of the Criminal Code and threatens with advanced prison penalties. prof. of Law Sławomir Patyra these statements are funny: – A catalogue of penalties in the Criminal Code for crimes specified as the desire to take up the office for which you were elected, or to take a vow against a sovereign in the presence of public officials, is besides humanitarian. There should be at least a wheel break. And already seriously emphasises: – If there is any obstruction, even the usage of violence, then verbal force has just been applied by Mr Warchol, threatening the public officials elected by the Sejm with the fact that if they proceed to insist on a good origin to be allowed to judge, they will endure negative consequences. Bullshit, nonsense, nonsense again!
